Supporting Mental Health Initiatives in the Ithaca Community

Jed Campus

In a scathing critique of student mental health at Ivy League schools, a new report gives Cornell University a grade of D- for its mental health leave of absence policy. No Ivy scored higher than a D, and Yale and Dartmouth were assigned F grades.

“The leave of absence policies do not reflect institutional commitment to supporting students with mental health disabilities,” the report said. “When it comes to inclusion of students with mental health disabilities, the Ivy League schools do not provide the leadership that the landscape of higher education desperately needs…The findings demonstrate that the Ivy League schools, the most elite institutions in our nation, are failing to lead the sector of higher education in supporting students with mental health disabilities.”

While generally critical of how universities are meeting student mental health challenges, the report focuses on the aspect of leave of absence policies. Noting that a health leave is a potentially useful mechanism enabling a student to focus on well being and recovery, “schools may also use the leave of absence as a tool for discrimination, pushing students out of school who are entitled by law to receive accommodations and supports which would enable them to stay.”

The report claims that college campuses are facing a unique crisis, arguing that the prevalence rates of mental illness among college students are far larger than prevalence rates for age-matched non-college individuals.

The Ruderman report says:

“Meanwhile, college resources provide woefully inadequate support to students. … The scope of the problem, combined with the lack of resources available to address the problem, is exerting a horrible toll. Suicide is among the most tragic consequences of untreated mental illness and it is the second leading cause of death of college students…”

“Clearly, colleges need to invest in increasing the availability of mental health professionals on campus. One clinician for every one thousand students is not enough, and this ratio represents the availability of clinicians on the campuses with the most resources.”

The report speculates that college administrators are wary of bad press coverage about campus suicides, and that their fear of a lawsuit if a student takes their own life motivates them to remove students from campus.

In the study, Ruderman cited “problematic” issues in seven of 15 categories related to Cornell’s leave of absence policy. It said there was “room for improvement” in two other issues, and that the university followed “best practice” in six others.

Here are the 15 categories and Cornell’s scores in them:

PUTTING A STUDENT ON LEAVE

1. Does the involuntary leave policy include “threat to self” language (with the premise that the inclusion of this language is facially discriminatory)?

The policy states, “…whether the student’s behavior is disruptive of the university’s learning environment and whether the behavior poses a direct threat to the safety of others…”

Grade: Best Practice

2. Do leave policies specify that the student is entitled to reasonable accommodations which would enable them to stay at school?

The policy states, “Consideration will also be given to accommodations that may reasonably be provided that will mitigate the need for the involuntary leave.” There is no mention of individualized assessment.

Grade: Ambiguous / Room for improvement

3. Do leave policies include language against generalization, fear, or stereotype?

There is no language against generalization, fear, or stereotype.

Grade: Problematic

4. Is there language about community disruption?

The policy states, “When there is an actual or the threat of a community disruption, Cornell University may place a student on an involuntary leave of absence.”

Grade: Problematic

5. Does the policy empower students to work with mental health professionals of their choice?

The student must get approval to take a leave and return from leave from Cornell Health (it can’t be an outside treatment provider). Also, a Cornell Health clinician or counselor will provide “…specific treatment recommendations as part of the HLOA agreement. Compliance with the treatment expectations is a primary factor in approving a student’s return to Cornell.”

Grade: Problematic

6. Can the student initiate the process at any time?

There are no health leaves of absence after the last day of classes.

Grade: Problematic

7. Are policies and procedures transparent?

All decisions regarding return from an HLOA are made by an interdisciplinary committee of Cornell Health clinicians. Student requests to return are denied only when the committee is unanimous in its opinion that a return is not advisable at this time. The return process checklist also provides transparency. Also, the involuntary leave policy states that involuntary leaves are imposed only “in extraordinary circumstances.”

Grade: Best practice

THE LEAVE ITSELF

8. Is there a minimum length of time for the leave?

The policy states, “The duration of the leave is to be determined by the vice president for student and campus life based on the facts and circumstances leading up to the imposition of the involuntary leave…For health leave, amount of time will depend on the circumstances.” The mental health provider report requests information, including “Once achieved, has the substantial reduction [in behaviors such as suicidal behaviors, self injury, food purging] been maintained stably for 3 consecutive months?” This may suggest that three months is the minimum duration.

Grade: Ambiguous / Room for improvement

9. Does the school specify a maximum duration or maximum number of leaves?

There is no language about maximum number or duration.

Grade: Best Practice

10. Does the policy identify a liaison or contact person at the school?

The policy does not identify a liaison or a contact person.

Grade: Problematic

11. Are students on leave prohibited from visiting campus?

The policy states, “The student may visit campus only as authorized in writing by the vice president for student and campus life.” The policy states, “Where appropriate, impose a persona non grata order on a student who has been placed on involuntary leave.”

Grade: Problematic

12. Are there work or school requirements?

The policy states, “It is expected that the student uses the time away from the University for treatment and recovery.” The policy states, “Until the student complies with the pre-requisites to enrollment mandated by the vice president for student and campus life. An individualized assessment will be made for the student to determine if the pre-requisites have been satisfied.”

Grade: Best practice

RETURNING FROM LEAVE

13. What is the deadline to apply for return?

The student must notify Cornell Health in writing of their wish to return by June 1 for a Fall return and November 1 for a Spring return. Submit documentation by July 1 for fall semester return, by December 1 for spring semester return. The score is based on the documentation deadlines.

Grade: Best Practice

14. Does the policy mention confidentiality, and facilitate confidentiality by specifying that medical records should be submitted to health services, not school administration?

Voluntary leave policy states – “December 22, 2017: Added note at end of procedures indicating that requests for health-care related leaves should be referred to Cornell Health to initiate the HLOA [Health Leave of Absence] process, and that academic units should not request health information or medical records directly from a student.” There is no explicit mention of confidentiality.

Grade: Ambiguous / Room for improvement

15. Does the policy facilitate student participation in university housing?

The policy does not mention housing.

Grade: Problematic

The rating system allotted a score of 1 if problematic, 2 if there was room for improvement, and 3 for best practice.

In 2017, The Sophie Fund, an Ithaca nonprofit organization advocating for youth mental heath, released a proposal aimed at supporting students taking leaves of absence for mental health reasons from Cornell University, Ithaca College, and Tompkins Cortland Community College.

The proposal calls for an Ithaca community-based program featuring a “leave of absence coach,” a community outreach worker providing practical guidance and moral support for students in transition. It also proposes a website hosting useful information about college leave policies, strategies for fruitful time off from school, local housing options, and employment opportunities. To date, no tangible progress has been made in funding or implementing the proposal.

“Leaves of absence entail an often unexpected, abrupt, and painful loss of a structured environment that includes a support network of friends, professors, university staff, roommates and other fellow students, campus organizations, cultural and athletic facilities, and school medical providers,” the proposal says. “Testimonies from students on mental health leaves of absence relate how it can be a confidence-crushing experience that induces shame and guilt.”

In April 2017 and again in August 2018, The Sophie Fund’s founders, Scott MacLeod and Susan Hack, called on Cornell University President Martha E. Pollack to launch an independent external-led review of student mental health. They said the review should include “Cornell’s policies, programs, and practices for students taking HLOA for mental health reasons.”

In a September 18 email to Cornell students reported by the Cornell Daily Sun, Vice President Ryan Lombardi announced plans for “a comprehensive review of student mental health” that will bring together “internal and external partners.”

In a September 18 email to the Sun, Lombardi said: “While for many years the university has engaged in regular assessment of student mental health needs and evaluation of services and programs, the decision to pursue an additional comprehensive review of student mental health reflects the University’s commitment to promoting health and well-being as a foundation for academic and personal success.”

We have written a letter to President Martha E. Pollack stating that the recent review of Cornell University’s mental health practices by The Jed Foundation is “plainly insufficient” and calling on her to appoint an external-led task force to perform an “independent, transparent, and robust review.”

Statue of Andrew Dickson White, Cornell’s first president, in the Arts Quad

Our daughter, Sophie Hack MacLeod ’14, died by suicide at age 23 in Ithaca while on a Health Leave of Absence from Cornell, where she was enrolled in the College of Architecture, Art, and Planning. In setting up The Sophie Fund in her memory to advocate for mental health initiatives aiding young people in the greater Ithaca community, we became very concerned about the mental health policies, programs, and practices for supporting Cornell students.

We initially wrote to President Pollack on April 19, 2017, just after she assumed office as Cornell’s 14th president, detailing our concerns about “systemic failure” in Cornell’s institutional handling of mental health matters, and called on her to establish an independent task force to report on Cornell’s mental health policies, practices, and programs and to make recommendations on needed improvements.

In a January 11, 2018 email to us, President Pollack declined our request. She cited an “external assessment” conducted by The JED Foundation, JED’s on-site visit to the Cornell campus in the summer of 2017, and Cornell’s “ongoing engagement with the foundation to ensure we are providing holistic support.” She also cited the JED review in subsequent remarks to Cornell’s Graduate and Professional Student Assembly (GPSA) and the Cornell Daily Sun.

In a letter last month, dated August 23, we informed President Pollack that we have examined what Cornell has made public about JED’s “external assessment” and concluded that it is plainly insufficient. It is not the independent, transparent, and robust review that we sought and that we believe Cornell’s students deserve. And it does not adequately address many of the concerns we raised in our original 2017 letter—about practical issues such as campus and off-campus mental health services and the high incidence of sexual assault and hazing misconduct, as well as policy concerns such as a defensive mindset that appears to prioritize Cornell’s public image over the welfare of students struggling with mental disorders.

We pointed out that, despite her promise to release the JED report, to date Cornell has chosen to publish—on the Cornell Health website—only two documents related to the review.

A glaring and troubling omission in the two posted documents is any reference in findings or recommendations regarding the capacity of the Counseling and Psychological Services staff to meet the demands of students for services. Another omission is any reference to the capacity of community mental health providers to address the needs of Cornell students referred to those off-campus services by CAPS. The documents report no findings and make no recommendations in areas such as academic workloads and faculty and academic staff handling of students in distress.

We explained to President Pollack that it does not appear that the JED review included a comprehensive assessment of Cornell’s suicide prevention policies and practices. However, we commended Cornell Health Executive Director Kent Bullis for recently announcing provisional support for the Zero Suicide Model initiative within the framework of the Tompkins County Suicide Prevention Coalition.

As we wrote in our letter to President Pollack, we do not believe that the JED review can be considered an independent external assessment because institutions of higher education pay The JED Foundation a $22,000 fee to become what JED calls “partners” in the JED Campus program. Furthermore, the director of Cornell’s Counseling and Psychological Services has a longstanding professional relationship with JED and is a member of its Advisory Board. The JED External Contributor who conducted JED’s on-site visit to the Cornell campus is a professional colleague of the CAPS director.

Neither of the two posted documents contain any JED findings; rather, in the first document JED merely makes brief comments on Cornell’s self-reported survey responses, and in the second document JED makes recommendations without reference to any findings they are presumably based on.

We understand that the review entailed only one on-site campus visit by a JED External Contributor, and the visit lasted merely three hours. We also understand that the External Contributor’s visit did not include meetings with any of the community providers who receive many CAPS referrals.

According to the JED Campus program, its partnerships with participating colleges’ mental health programs include the following five elements, which Cornell has not released: a Strategic Plan “complete with detailed objectives and action steps for implementation”; a Fourth-Year Post-Assessment “evaluating systems change”; a Healthy Minds Study, which JED describes as “an in-depth assessment of students’ attitudes, behaviors and awareness of mental health issues”; a Feedback Report on the JED Campus and Healthy Minds Study findings; and a Summary Report containing data analysis for the JED Campus assessment and the Healthy Minds Study. JED declined to release its Cornell report to us, citing a confidentiality agreement with Cornell.

We believe that the JED review is clearly inadequate for a comprehensive assessment of the serious mental health challenges faced by a large university campus today, especially one located in a small upstate community. As we reminded President Pollack, the 2017 Cornell PULSE Survey of 5,001 undergraduates reported that 71.6 percent of respondents often or very often felt “overwhelmed,” and 42.9 percent said that they had been unable to function academically for at least a week on one or more occasions due to depression, stress, or anxiety. Nearly 10 percent of respondents reported being unable to function during a week-long period on five or more occasions. Nine percent of the respondents—about 450 students—reported “having seriously considered suicide at least once during the last year,” and about 85 students reported having actually attempted suicide at least once in the last year.

We have often heard the view that Cornell’s mental health policies are better than those of many universities, and that Cornell’s mental health statistics are no worse. We find such a complacent view to be surprising and disappointing, especially coming from a world-renowned research institution. In fact, these escalating mental health challenges require a relentless approach in response from everyone in a position to act. We truly hope that President Pollack—and Cornell—will lead the way.

—By Scott MacLeod and Susan Hack

Scott MacLeod and Susan Hack are the co-founders of The Sophie Fund, a nonprofit organization advocating mental health initiatives aiding young people in the greater Ithaca community. The organization is named in memory of their daughter Sophie Hack MacLeod, a Cornell fine arts student who took her own life in Ithaca in 2016.

UPDATE 9/7/18:

Lee Swain, director of JED Campus, sent the following comment to The Sophie Fund:

I do see one inaccuracy I’d like to correct related to this paragraph:

“According to the JED Campus program, its partnerships with participating colleges’ mental health programs include the following five elements, which Cornell has not released: a Strategic Plan “complete with detailed objectives and action steps for implementation”; a Fourth-Year Post-Assessment “evaluating systems change”; a Healthy Minds Study, which JED describes as “an in-depth assessment of students’ attitudes, behaviors and awareness of mental health issues”; a Feedback Report on the JED Campus and Healthy Minds Study findings; and a Summary Report containing data analysis for the JED Campus assessment and the Healthy Minds Study. JED declined to release its Cornell report to us, citing a confidentiality agreement with Cornell.”

The elements you describe are part of our current program. I believe Erica explained to you how the program has changed. When Cornell joined, the program was designed slightly differently than is currently described on our website. For instance, we did not have a partnership with or include the Healthy Minds Study at that time. So, Cornell did not participate in that data collection. Also, Cornell is not completely through the four year program yet, which is why they have not posted or shared the “fourth year post assessment” as it has not yet been completed. It should also be noted that because Cornell joined an earlier version of the program than what is described on the website, they also only paid $1,950, the cost of the program at that time, not the $22,000 that schools currently pay which includes the Healthy Minds Study, a day long visit (sometimes a bit more) and policy and protocol review (both at the beginning of the program and throughout as policies are changed/adapted). We also collect more data on counseling center utilization, crisis incidents, and staffing patterns in the current version of the program than in the original version.